DOCSLIB.ORG

Plants of Concern: Standardized Rare Plant Monitoring Using Trained Volunteers

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Plants of Concern: Standardized Rare Plant Monitoring Using Trained Volunteers Plants of Concern: Standardized Rare Plant Monitoring Using Trained Volunteers Final Report to Illinois Department of Natural Resources, Illinois Wildlife Preservation Fund Grant #12-L01W Chicago Botanic Garden December, 2012 Covering the grant period from July 1, 2011 to December 1, 2012 with comparative discussion from 2001-2010 Submitted by: Susanne Masi, Manager of Regional Floristics Principal Investigator Co-authored by: Rachel Goad, Research Assistant, Plants of Concern With contributions from: Bianca Rosenbaum, Conservation Data Manager TABLE OF CONTENTS Concepts and Objectives ________________________________________________________ 1 Summary: Monitoring Results 2001-2007 ____________________________________________ 2 The Volunteer Component ______________________________________________________ 3 Level 1 Monitoring Data Analysis _________________________________________________ 5 Level 2 Demographic Monitoring Update ___________________________________________ 14 Program Evaluation ____________________________________________________________ 14 Conclusion and Future Directions _________________________________________________ 21 Attachments __________________________________________________________________ 23 PLANTS OF CONCERN: CONCEPT AND OBJECTIVES This document is a report covering the period July 1, 2011 through December 1, 2012 with detailed analysis of the 2011 season in relation to previous seasons, as well as a preliminary account of the 2012 season. Final 2012 numbers are not yet available. Plants of Concern (POC) was launched in 2001. This long-term rare plant monitoring initiative is unique to the region in its use of standardized monitoring protocols used by trained citizen scientists. The program has now completed ten years of monitoring and has accumulated a substantial base for analyzing long-term data on a significant number of species and Element Occurrences (EOs). Species monitored by POC were initially selected largely from the 1999 Chicago Wilderness Biodiversity Recovery Plan’s species priority list, because they are state endangered or threatened and are considered by regional land managers and ecologists to be rare and significant within the Chicago Wilderness region (CW). In subsequent years, POC staff and landowners have decided, on a case-by-case basis, that any listed plant was eligible to be included in the program. The non-listed species monitored by POC are “species of concern” that represent individual landowners’ choices of rare, high quality species that they wish to track at the county level. Through 2011, POC monitored 120 listed species and 117 rare species. The primary geographic area covered by POC from 2001-2006 included the six counties of northeast Illinois, with one site in Kankakee County. In 2009, four sites from Kendall County, Illinois were added. Because of POC’s Chicago Wilderness affiliation, since 2007, 15 sites have been added in northwest Indiana and six sites in southeast Wisconsin (see GIS Map, Attachment 1). This report will focus on Illinois counties and species. POC incorporates the following interrelated elements, all equally important to its success and recognition as a unique and valuable long-term monitoring program: Monitoring rare plants, particularly state-listed species, over time using a standardized census protocol to gain uniform data (plant numbers, population area, GPS coordinates, invasive and other threats, and management activities) on populations on a regional basis (Level 1 Monitoring Form, Attachment 2). Select species are targeted for more intensive demographic monitoring (Level 2) that supports projects coordinated by CBG researchers assisted by volunteers. Monitoring rare species in relation to management activities as reported by both monitors and land managers to form a feedback loop for short- and long-term adaptive management responses (Attachment 3). Analyzing the POC long-term dataset for an increased understanding of population trends in relation to management activities and to invasive species and other threats. Training volunteers as citizen scientists to leverage agency resources for monitoring rare species and to create an informed conservation constituency. Working in partnership with public and private landowners, land managers, and agencies, through an Advisory Group (Attachment 4), to generate a shared approach to regional monitoring. In 2012, two staff members, a manager and a research assistant, managed the overall POC program. Two other research assistants worked at Midewin National Tallgrass Prairie on a POC-based monitoring program and with the Cook County Forest Preserve District monitoring effort, respectively. Finally, a part-time intern was assigned to the Openlands Lakeshore Preserve monitoring program. Reports on the listed species monitored through all these programs are included in the reports to the Illinois Natural Heritage Database. 1 SUMMARY: CUMULATIVE MONITORING RESULTS 2001 – 2011 In 2011, POC’s eleventh year, the program exhibited growth in nearly all measures of accomplishment and participation. The number of monitored subpopulations remained steady from 2010, although the number of monitored EORs was greater. Retention of EOs was steady, with 51% of EOs monitored in previous years also monitored in 2011. In 2011, 122 new EOs were monitored, nearly twice as many as were newly monitored in 2010. The Illinois Natural Heritage Database tracks listed species across the state, and POC monitors 66% of the 923 EOs and 80% of the 169 listed species in seven northeast Illinois counties that this agency records (July 2011). It is important to note, however, that the percentage given for EOs monitored is slightly inflated because a single EO in the state database may include several sites, whereas POC EOs are site specific. The following graph and table are discussed in detail in the remainder of the report and in Attachments 5-7. (Note: Statistics in the following figures, tables and attachments were derived from the POC database for analysis on several different dates starting 9/17/2012 and may reflect minor discrepancies in numbers. Graphs from previous years may not correspond precisely due to late report submissions, merging of subpopulations and other factors). Figure 1. POC accomplishments and participation for all years, 2001-2011. Includes IN and WI. 1000 800 600 400 200 0 Species (237) EORs (1001) Subpops (1748) Sites (308) Landowners (112) Volunteers (671) 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Table 1. POC accomplishments and participation for all years, 2001-2011, including IN and WI. 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Cumulative Species * 45 66 78 95 108 143 144 164 166 164 176 237 EORs 98 153 180 246 281 366 431 510 524 501 570 1001 Subpopulations ** 127 237 259 403 455 581 680 819 810 859 861 1748 Sites 59 75 83 117 133 151 181 199 196 192 222 308 Landowners 24 32 38 42 44 54 63 69 65 68 79 112 Volunteers 53 96 104 154 170 167 215 264 266 243 268 671 * Includes 120 (IL) listed and 117 rare, non-listed species (Attachment 5). **A subpopulation is defined as a grouping of a species within the same EO that is tracked separately because it is located more than 50 meters from another grouping, or because the grouping is within a different management unit or habitat. 2 Species monitored in multiple counties (see Attachment 5 for a breakdown of listed and non-listed species and the number of EOs monitored for each). Species (listed and non-listed) monitored across multiple counties are the basis for a regional assessment of species status. Illinois 1 species in 6 counties 7 species in 5 counties 15 species in 4 counties 33 species in 3 counties 60 species in 2 counties 113 species in 1 county 2001-2011 cumulative EOs monitored (listed and non-listed), by IL county: Cook: 221 DuPage: 176 Kane: 68 Kankakee: 2 Kendall: 10 Lake: 295 McHenry: 112 Will: 63 Total: 947 THE VOLUNTEER COMPONENT OF POC: CITIZEN SCIENTISTS Without volunteers, POC could not function successfully. Both public conservation agencies and private groups recognize the importance of leveraging volunteer resources for monitoring and management work. Citizen science, now termed Public Participation in Scientific Research by the Citizen Science Central network out of the Cornell Lab of Ornithology, is increasingly acknowledged as a method for gathering reliable and valuable data, thereby greatly expanding potential for scientific analysis. Each major agency working with POC typically has one or two staff, a volunteer coordinator, and/or ecologist assigned to work with POC in recruitment, training, and field assistance of volunteers. Note on volunteers for 2012. It is important to mention that this spring brought special challenges to all monitors. Because of record warm temperatures in early spring, plants started to bloom a month or more earlier than normal, some before training workshops were completed and new volunteers assigned to their species. There followed a challenging period of rapid communication with volunteers and volunteer coordinators as well as field checking for blooms in order to monitor the many spring bloomers in time. Monitors rose to the occasion and most came through very well. The record-breaking high temperatures and drought during the summer brought additional challenges to volunteers, and to the plant species themselves. Final tallies for 2012, which will be completed by March 2013, will demonstrate the effects of these conditions on POC volunteer numbers. 3 Volunteer
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Asclepias Purpurascens L. Purple Milkweed
    Asclepias purpurascens L. purple milkweed State Distribution Photo by Michael R. Penskar Best Survey Period Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Legal status: State threatened one or two additional umbels are present in the upper leaf axils. The individual flowers, which are usually Global and state rank: G4G5/S3 from 13-17 mm long, bear reflexed, purplish corolla lobes that are glabrous (smooth), pale purple hoods Family: Asclepiadaceae (milkweed family) (forming the corona) 5-7 mm long, and incurved flat horns that are shorter than the hood. The reproductive Total range: Asclepias purpurascens is found parts (filaments, anthers, and style) are fused into a principally in eastern North America, occurring from structure called the gynostegium. The fruit is a smooth New Hampshire south to Virginia and ranging west to follicle (a pod) filled with seeds attached to downy hairs Wisconsin, Iowa, Kansas, and Oklahoma. (coma) that aid in wind dispersal. State distribution: Purple milkweed is known from Asclepias purpurascens is often difficult to distinguish more than 60 occurrences in southern Michigan; thirty- from the very similar looking common milkweed, four of these records are derived from collections made Asclepias syriaca, which despite its unfortunate prior to 1930. This species is concentrated primarily Latin epithet is also a native milkweed. Overall, the in southeastern and southwestern Lower Michigan, leaves of A. purpurascens are more acute and less where it is known from 19 counties, with most counties predominately pinnately–veined (i.e. more strongly tallying only a single occurrence. Counties with the net-veined) than A.
    [Show full text]
  • Cypripedium Candidum Muhl
    Cypripedium candidum Muhl. ex Willd. small white lady’s-slipper State Distribution Best Survey Period Photo by Susan R. Crispin Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Status: State threatened clonal clumps. This relatively small lady’s-slipper averages about 20 cm in height, each stem producing several Global and state rank: G4/S2 strongly-ribbed, sheathing leaves that are densely short-hairy. Stems are usually terminated by a single Other common names: white lady-slipper flower (occasionally there may be two) characterized Family: Orchidaceae (orchid family) by its ivory-white pouch (the lip or lower petal) which may be faintly streaked with purple veins toward the Total range: This principally upper Midwestern species bottom and slightly purple-spotted around the pouch ranges eastward to New Jersey and New York, extending opening. The lateral petals, which are similar to the west through southern Michigan to Minnesota, the eastern sepals, are pale yellow-green and spirally twisted. Dakotas, and southern Manitoba and Saskatchewan. To the Cypripedium candidum is known to hybridize with two south it ranges to Nebraska, Missouri, and Kentucky. It is well-known varieties of yellow lady’s-slipper, C. calceolus considered rare in Iowa (S1), Illinois (S3), Indiana (S2), var. pubescens and C. calceolus var. parviflora, producing Kentucky (S1), Michigan (S2), Minnesota (S3), North C. Xfavillianum and C. Xandrewsii, respectively. These Dakota (S2S3), New York (S1), Ohio (S1), South Dakota hybrids are the only taxa that small white lady-slipper is (S1), Wisconsin, and Manitoba. In Pennsylvania and likely to be confused with.
    [Show full text]
  • Guide to the Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, and Georgia, Working Draft of 17 March 2004 -- LILIACEAE
    Guide to the Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, and Georgia, Working Draft of 17 March 2004 -- LILIACEAE LILIACEAE de Jussieu 1789 (Lily Family) (also see AGAVACEAE, ALLIACEAE, ALSTROEMERIACEAE, AMARYLLIDACEAE, ASPARAGACEAE, COLCHICACEAE, HEMEROCALLIDACEAE, HOSTACEAE, HYACINTHACEAE, HYPOXIDACEAE, MELANTHIACEAE, NARTHECIACEAE, RUSCACEAE, SMILACACEAE, THEMIDACEAE, TOFIELDIACEAE) As here interpreted narrowly, the Liliaceae constitutes about 11 genera and 550 species, of the Northern Hemisphere. There has been much recent investigation and re-interpretation of evidence regarding the upper-level taxonomy of the Liliales, with strong suggestions that the broad Liliaceae recognized by Cronquist (1981) is artificial and polyphyletic. Cronquist (1993) himself concurs, at least to a degree: "we still await a comprehensive reorganization of the lilies into several families more comparable to other recognized families of angiosperms." Dahlgren & Clifford (1982) and Dahlgren, Clifford, & Yeo (1985) synthesized an early phase in the modern revolution of monocot taxonomy. Since then, additional research, especially molecular (Duvall et al. 1993, Chase et al. 1993, Bogler & Simpson 1995, and many others), has strongly validated the general lines (and many details) of Dahlgren's arrangement. The most recent synthesis (Kubitzki 1998a) is followed as the basis for familial and generic taxonomy of the lilies and their relatives (see summary below). References: Angiosperm Phylogeny Group (1998, 2003); Tamura in Kubitzki (1998a). Our “liliaceous” genera (members of orders placed in the Lilianae) are therefore divided as shown below, largely following Kubitzki (1998a) and some more recent molecular analyses. ALISMATALES TOFIELDIACEAE: Pleea, Tofieldia. LILIALES ALSTROEMERIACEAE: Alstroemeria COLCHICACEAE: Colchicum, Uvularia. LILIACEAE: Clintonia, Erythronium, Lilium, Medeola, Prosartes, Streptopus, Tricyrtis, Tulipa. MELANTHIACEAE: Amianthium, Anticlea, Chamaelirium, Helonias, Melanthium, Schoenocaulon, Stenanthium, Veratrum, Toxicoscordion, Trillium, Xerophyllum, Zigadenus.
    [Show full text]
  • Invasive Plants Alert: Rapunculoides), Spreading from an Native Species And, Where Possible, Abandoned Homestead, Is Threatening Local Seed Sources
    Newsletter of the Native Plant Society of Saskatchewan Inc. Volume 3, Number 2 Fall 1998 Invasive Plants Alert: rapunculoides), spreading from an native species and, where possible, abandoned homestead, is threatening local seed sources. Prairie Region to take over the northernmost site of By Eric Haber, Invasive Plants Alert: the small white lady’s-slipper. Responses from naturalist clubs and 1997-98 Report, February 1998 other groups have provided insights Smooth brome (Bromus inermis) is into local activities and concerns Summarized by Jolene Vanthuyne posing problems on the prairies. dealing with the spread and control of Spreading from roadside seeding, invasive plants. Information on club Even the Canadian Forces helped out smooth brome is threatening native activities and species of concern are when the Saskatoon Nature Society fescue prairie and the rare yellow presented as information notices on issued a call to eradicate purple paintbrush (Castilleja cusickii) in the Alert Bulletin located at: loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria). Alberta. Also, crested wheat grass http://infoweb.magi.com/~ehaber/ipab (Agropyron cristatum) has formed a ull.html In the summer of 1997, Canadian noticeable “plume” within the native Forces troops, engaged in training mixed grassland in Alberta. exercises along the South Inside This Issue: Saskatchewan River, reported Because of the harm these aggressive sightings to the provincial purple plants cause native vegetation, President’s Message......................... 2 loosestrife eradication committee after
    [Show full text]
  • Pollination and Comparative Reproductive Success of Lady’S Slipper Orchids Cypripedium Candidum , C
    POLLINATION AND COMPARATIVE REPRODUCTIVE SUCCESS OF LADY’S SLIPPER ORCHIDS CYPRIPEDIUM CANDIDUM , C. PARVIFLORUM , AND THEIR HYBRIDS IN SOUTHERN MANITOBA by Melissa Anne Pearn A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies of The University of Manitoba in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Department of Biological Sciences University of Manitoba Winnipeg Copyright 2012 by Melissa Pearn ABSTRACT I investigated how orchid biology, floral morphology, and diversity of surrounding floral and pollinator communities affected reproductive success and hybridization of Cypripedium candidum and C. parviflorum . Floral dimensions, including pollinator exit routes were smallest in C. candidum , largest in C. parviflorum , with hybrids intermediate and overlapping with both. This pattern was mirrored in the number of insect visitors, fruit set, and seed set. Exit route size seemed to restrict potential pollinators to a subset of visiting insects, which is consistent with reports from other rewardless orchids. Overlap among orchid taxa in morphology, pollinators, flowering phenology, and spatial distribution, may affect the frequency and direction of pollen transfer and hybridization. The composition and abundance of co-flowering rewarding plants seems to be important for maintaining pollinators in orchid populations. Comparisons with orchid fruit set indicated that individual co-flowering species may be facilitators or competitors for pollinator attention, affecting orchid reproductive success. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Throughout my master’s research, I benefited from the help and support of many great people. I am especially grateful to my co-advisors Anne Worley and Bruce Ford, without whom this thesis would not have come to fruition. Their expertise, guidance, support, encouragement, and faith in me were invaluable in helping me reach my goals.
    [Show full text]
  • Model-Based Scenario Planning to Develop Climate Change Adaptation Strategies for Rare Plant Populations in Grassland Reserves
    Biological Conservation 193 (2016) 103–114 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Biological Conservation journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/bioc Model-based scenario planning to develop climate change adaptation strategies for rare plant populations in grassland reserves Laura Phillips-Mao a,⁎, Susan M. Galatowitsch a, Stephanie A. Snyder b,RobertG.Haightb a Department of Fisheries, Wildlife and Conservation Biology, University of Minnesota, 135 Skok Hall, 2003 Upper Buford Circle, Saint Paul, MN 55108, USA b USDA Forest Service, Northern Research Station, 1992 Folwell Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55108, USA article info abstract Article history: Incorporating climate change into conservation decision-making at site and population scales is challenging due Received 24 February 2015 to uncertainties associated with localized climate change impacts and population responses to multiple Received in revised form 16 October 2015 interacting impacts and adaptation strategies. We explore the use of spatially explicit population models to facil- Accepted 21 October 2015 itate scenario analysis, a conservation planning approach for situations of high uncertainty. We developed dy- Available online 4 December 2015 namic, linked habitat suitability and metapopulation models using RAMAS GIS to consider management and Keywords: monitoring options for a grassland reserve in Minnesota (USA) in order to support a hydrologically sensitive Cypripedium candidum rare orchid (Cypripedium candidum). We evaluated 54 future scenarios combining changes in drought frequency, Habitat suitability increased depth to water table, and multiple configurations of increased invasive species cover and management. Metapopulation model Simulation results allowed us to prioritize adaptation strategies and monitoring guidelines to inform adaptive Monitoring management for our model system. For example, preventing further spread of invasive species into the current Invasion C.
    [Show full text]
  • Incidental Take Guidelines for Listed Plants in Prairies
    July 2019 Broad Incidental Take Permit/Authorization Grassland and Savanna Protocols Listed Plants in Prairies, Grasslands, and Savannas (Required on Public Lands, Encouraged on Private Lands) This Broad Incidental Take Permit/Authorization (BITP/A) has been issued by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources to allow landowners to conduct certain grassland and savanna management activities while remaining in compliance with the state’s endangered species law (s. 29.604, Wis. Stats.). This BITP/A allows for the incidental taking (mortality) of the state endangered and threatened plant species in Section I that may occur as a result of the grassland and savanna management activities listed in Section II. Full background information/criteria on this BITP/A can be found here: https://dnr.wi.gov/topic/ERReview/Documents/GSP_Overview.pdf Protocols for all other species covered under this BITP/A can be found here: https://dnr.wi.gov/topic/ERReview/ItGrasslands.html Note: If carrying out a given protocol is not feasible, or multiple listed species in a given management area pose conflicts, contact the Bureau of Natural Heritage Conservation (NHC) at [email protected]. Staff in NHC will work with species experts and managers to establish an acceptable protocol for a given site that will allow for incidental take without further legal consultation or public notice. I. Species Covered Common Name Scientific Name Wisconsin Status Round-stemmed false foxglove Agalinis gattingeri Threatened Pale false foxglove A. skinneriana Endangered Carolina anemone Anemone caroliniana Endangered Hudson Bay anemone A. multifida Endangered Woolly milkweed Asclepias lanuginosa Threatened Dwarf milkweed A. ovalifolia Threatened Purple milkweed A.
    [Show full text]
  • Best Practice: Environmental Stewardship by a Private Landowner
    Best Practice: Environmental Stewardship by a Private Landowner Prepared by: Jennifer Pachkowski December 2002 Rural Development Institute Brandon University Brandon, MB R7A 6A9 Ph 204-571-8550 Fax 204-729-9090 Email [email protected] Table of Contents PLANT DESCRIPTION .............................................................................................................................. 1 POPULATION AND DISTRIBUTION....................................................................................................... 1 ENDANGERED STATUS........................................................................................................................... 2 THREATS TO POPULATION ................................................................................................................... 2 MANAGEMENT OF THE BRANDON SITE............................................................................................ 3 COMPARISON OF MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES............................................................................. 5 CHALLENGES ............................................................................................................................................ 5 CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................................. 6 REFERENCES............................................................................................................................................. 7 Introduction Since the beginning of agriculture
    [Show full text]
  • Diversity and Evolution of Monocots
    Lilioids - petaloid monocots 4 main groups: Diversity and Evolution • Acorales - sister to all monocots • Alismatids of Monocots – inc. Aroids - jack in the pulpit ! • Lilioids (lilies, orchids, yams) – grade, non-monophyletic – petaloid . orchids and palms . ! • Commelinoids – Arecales – palms – Commelinales – spiderwort – Zingiberales –banana – Poales – pineapple – grasses & sedges Lilioids - petaloid monocots Asparagales: *Orchidaceae - orchids • finish the Asparagales by 1. Terrestrial/epiphytes: plants looking at the largest family - typically not aquatic the orchids 2. Geophytes: herbaceous above ground with below ground modified perennial stems: bulbs, corms, rhizomes, tubers 3. Tepals: showy perianth in 2 series of 3 each; usually all petaloid, or outer series not green and sepal-like & with no bracts 1 *Orchidaceae - orchids *Orchidaceae - orchids The family is diverse with about 880 genera and over 22,000 All orchids have a protocorm - a feature restricted to the species, mainly of the tropics family. Orchids are • structure formed after germination and before the mycotrophic (= fungi development of the seedling plant dependent) lilioids; • has no radicle but instead mycotrophic tissue some are obligate mycotrophs Cypripedium acaule Corallorhiza striata Stemless lady-slipper Striped coral root Dactylorhiza majalis protocorm *Orchidaceae - orchids *Orchidaceae - orchids Cosmopolitan, but the majority of species are found in the Survive in these epiphytic and other harsh environments via tropics and subtropics, ranging from sea
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 4 Native Plants for Landscape Use in Kentucky
    Chapter 4 Native Plants for Landscape Use In Kentucky A publication of the Louisville Water Company Wellhead Protection Plan, Phase III Source Reduction Grant # X9-96479407-0 Chapter 4 Native Plants for Landscape Use in Kentucky Native Wildflowers and Ferns The U. S. Department of Transportation, (US DOT), has developed a listing of native plants, (ferns, annuals, perennials, shrubs, and trees), that may be used in landscaping in the State of Kentucky. Other agencies have also developed listings of native plants, which have been integrated into the list within this guidebook. While this list is, by no means, a complete report of the native species that may be found in Kentucky, it offers a starting point for additional research, should the homeowner wish to find additional KY native plants for use in a landscape design, or to check if a plant is native to the State. A reference book titled Wildflowers and Ferns of Kentucky, which was recommended by personnel at the Salato Wildlife Center as an excellent reference for native plants, was also used to develop the list. (A full bibliography is listed at the end of this chapter.) While many horticultural and botanical experts may dispute the inclusion of specific plants on the listing, or wish to add more plants, the list represents the latest information available for research, by the amateur, at the time. The information listed within the list was taken at face value, and no judgment calls were made about the suitability of plants for the list. The author makes no claims as to the completeness, accuracy, or timeliness of this list.
    [Show full text]
  • Cypripedium Montanum Douglas Ex Lindley (Mountain Lady's Slipper): a Technical Conservation Assessment
    Cypripedium montanum Douglas ex Lindley (mountain lady’s slipper): A Technical Conservation Assessment Prepared for the USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region, Species Conservation Project February 21, 2007 Nan C. Vance, Ph.D. Pacific Northwest Research Station 3200 SW Jefferson Way Corvallis, OR 97331 Peer Review Administered by Center for Plant Conservation Vance, N.C. (2007, February 21). Cypripedium montanum Douglas ex Lindley (mountain lady’s slipper): a technical conservation assessment. [Online]. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/projects/scp/assessments/cypripediummontanum.pdf [date of access]. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This project was funded in part by USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region, and Pacific Northwest Research Station, and by Kelsey Creek Laboratories, Issaquah, WA. Many thanks to Greg Karow, Forester, Bighorn National Forest who provided the essential and necessary site and population data for this assessment and Tucker Galloway whose dedicated field work provided important new information. Another important source of information is the Wyoming Natural Diversity Database, and I appreciate the excellent cooperation of Bonnie Heidel, Botanist, and Tessa Ducher, Database Specialist. I would also like to express my gratitude to Cathy Seibert, collections manager at the Montana State Herbarium, Peter Bernhardt, Professor of Botany at Saint Louis University, Dan Luoma and Joyce Eberhart, mycologists at Oregon State University, Roger and Jane Smith of Kelsey Creek Laboratories, and Julie Knorr, Botanist on the Klamath National Forest, for their help and information. I am grateful to David Anderson for his advice and for generously allowing me to use an assessment he authored as a model and guide.
    [Show full text]
  • Rare Plant Surveys by the Manitoba Conservation Data Centre, 2006
    Rare Plant Surveys by the Manitoba Conservation Data Centre, 2006 Manitoba Conservation Data Centre MS Report 07-01 Catherine Foster & Elizabeth Reimer Manitoba Conservation Data Centre Box 24, 200 Saulteaux Crescent Winnipeg, Manitoba R3J 3W3 Please cite as: Foster, C. and Reimer, E. 2007. Rare Plant Surveys by the Manitoba Conservation Data Centre, 2006. MS Report 07-01. Manitoba Conservation Data Centre, Winnipeg, Manitoba. 53 pp. Images: Except where noted, all images are © Manitoba Conservation Data Centre. Cover image: silky townsend daisy (Townsendia exscapa) top left; fascicled ironweed (Vernonia fasciculata ) bottom right. Executive Summary Information on 35 rare and uncommon plant species was gathered by the Manitoba Conservation Data Centre (CDC) in 2006 through field surveys and acquisition of data from associates. A total of 111 occurrences were newly documented or updated. Results of comprehensive field surveys of sites occupied by the following eight rare species are summarized in this report. Buffalograss (Buchloe dactyloides) Fascicled Ironweed (Vernonia fasciculata) Hairy Prairie-clover (Dalea villosa) Northern Adder’s-tongue (Ophioglossum pusillum) Ram’s-head Lady’s-slipper (Cypripedium arietinum) Silky Townsend Daisy (Townsendia exscapa) Small White Lady’s-slipper (Cypripedium candidum) Western Silvery Aster (Symphyotrichum sericeum) Data collected includes mapping plant patches in the field using a GPS equipped hand held computer, plant abundance, habitat characteristics and threats. Notes on the other 27 species surveyed by the CDC and associates are also included. Two information sharing and stewardship initiatives were implemented in 2006. Maps of road allowances supporting species at risk were produced for two rural municipalities to help mitigate threats associated with road maintenance activities.
    [Show full text]